apple_reminders_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates that the tool retrieves data (read operation) and lists specific fields, but does not elaborate on behavior like sorting, pagination, or whether only active reminders are returned by default (though include_completed parameter is documented). For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the action and return value. Every word is meaningful; no filler or redundancy. It is highly concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the primary purpose and return fields. However, it omits the optional parameter 'include_completed' in the description, which would improve completeness. No mention of result limits or sorting. Adequate for a basic list tool but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% (both parameters documented). The description does not add any additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides. It does not mention the 'include_completed' parameter, which is an optional but important control. Since schema already covers basics, score at baseline 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the action 'Get', the resource 'all reminders in a specific list', and lists the returned fields (name, completed, due date, priority, notes). It distinguishes from sibling tools like apple_reminders_complete or apple_reminders_create, which have different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for listing reminders in a specific list, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as apple_reminders_search for filtered results or apple_reminders_due for due-dated reminders. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.